Currently viewing the category: "EU law"

After Poland took over EU Presidency from Hungary on July 01, 2011, the Council of the European Union has published on July 08 a Document 12661/11 titled Organisation of work on the patent reform under the Polish Presidency:

The Presidency wishes to inform delegations of its decision to assign to the Friends of the Presidency Group the task of continuing the work on the following three files:

(a) Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection1 based on Article 118(1) TFEU;

(b) Proposal for a Council Regulation implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection with regard to the applicable translation arrangements2 based on Article 118(2) TFEU;

(c) Draft agreement on a Unified Patent Court and draft Statute .

The Friends of the Presidency Group is invited to regularly report back to COREPER about the outcome of its discussions.

To ensure political steering of the discussions, the responsibility for negotiations should be put on IPR Attachés, who could be accompanied by experts in relevant fields as necessary, in a 1+1 format. The Friends of Presidency Group will not have interpretation.

The Presidency intends to organise the first meetings of the Friends of the Presidency Group on 11 and 18 July, to which invitations will be forwarded to the IPR Attachés.

Well, what the heck is that “Friends of the Presidency Group”? Although Google surely is your friend, it appears to be a bit difficult to obtain any information on this obscure body. However, the Slovakian EU Presidency of 2008 had published a hint:

Continue reading »

 

Today, the EU Council has published two important Documents concerning the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) between the European Union and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the United Mexican States, the Kingdom of Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Singapore, the Swiss Confederation and the United States of America:

  • EU Council Document 12190/11 conveying Document COM(2011) 379 final of the EU Commission with a Proposal for a Council Decision on the signing, on behalf of the European Union of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA); and
  • EU Council Document 12193/11 conveying Document COM(2011) 380 final of the EU Commission with a Proposal for a Council Decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).

Obviously, a two-step process is anticipated:

  1. Document COM(2011) 379 final, if adopted, authorises the President of the Council to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the ACTA text.
  2. Document COM(2011) 380 final, if adopted, approves the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) on behalf of the European Union.

Consent of the European Parliament is required for approving ACTA. Since ACTA is considered “mixed” agreement, all 27 national Parliaments of the EU Member States also need to formally ratify. Some controversial debate is to be expected because of not all parliamentary groups of the European Parliament might be happy with signing and adoption of ACTA. Although the EU Commission claims that ACTA does not modify the EU acquis because EU law is already considerably more advanced than the current international standards, they want it be Officially approved, arguing that it will introduce a new international standard, building upon the World Trade Organisation’s TRIPS Agreement (adopted in 1994). According to the EU Commission, ACTA will provide benefits for EU exporting rightholders operating in the global market who currently suffer systematic and widespread infringements of their copyrights, trademarks, patents, designs and geographical indications abroad. Furthermore, EU Commission re-iterates that ACTA is a balanced agreement because it fully respects the rights of citizens and the concerns of important stakeholders such as consumers, internet providers and partners in developing countries. However, this assertion is likely to be politically contested in the EU Parliament as well as in various quarters of the public.

The final wording of ACTA is attached to both Documents mentioned above. A brief summary of the ACTA provisions can be taken from FICPI Working Document EXCO/ZA11/CET/1103 (PDF).

Recently the Mexican Senate has voted against ACTA; see here.